Read these instructions carefully before filling out Form 3015. This form is not used for day care licensing credentialing.

A resume does
not
substitute for any information required on Form 3015. To apply, you must submit all of the following:

According to Chapter 43 of the Human Resources Code, and Title 40 of the Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 745, Subchapter N, a person may not serve as an administrator of a child-placing agency without a child-placing agency administrator license, and may not serve as an administrator of a general residential operation (GRO) or residential treatment center (RTC) without a child-care administrator license.

To be eligible for a child-care administrator license
or
a child-placing agency administrator license, you must do as follows:

handwritten

Provide verification of your managerial experience by asking a present or former supervisor to submit one of the following reference forms, as applicable.
Note
: Under no circumstances does experience with a child-placing agency count toward meeting this requirement, if you are applying for a child-care administrator license; nor does institutional experience count toward meeting this requirement, if you are applying for a child-placing agency administrator license. Under no circumstances does experience as a foster parent or caregiver in a foster home count toward either license.

Pass an examination. The exam is multiple choice and includes questions covering the following topics:

The only study guide available for the exam is the current minimum standards, accessible through the DFPS website or by calling any local licensing office to request a copy.

If you intend to apply for both licenses,
you must pay the appropriate fees for each license, meet the minimum qualifications for each license, and pass each of the separate exams.

If you intend to apply for both licenses,

All
required documents must be received
before
your application can be approved or denied.

before

If you have questions about the eligibility requirements or applying for a license, contact the Child Care Licensing Administrator Licensing Program at 713-696-7119.

Now that we are feeling comfortable with just about everything built into Atom, let's look at how to tweak it. Perhaps there is a keybinding that you use a lot but feels wrong or a color that isn't quite right for you. Atom is amazingly flexible, so let's go over some of the simpler flexes it can do.

Objects are the backbone of any CSON file, and are delineated by indentation (as in the above example). A key's value can either be a String, a Number, an Object, a Boolean,
null
, or an Array of any of these data types.

Just like the more common JSON, CSON's keys can only be repeated once per object. If there are duplicate keys, then the last usage of that key overwrites all others, as if they weren't there. The same holds true for Atom's config files.

Don't do this:

Use this instead:

If you want to apply quick-and-dirty personal styling changes without creating an entire theme that you intend to publish, you can add styles to the
styles.less
file in your
~/.atom
%USERPROFILE%\.atom
directory. You can open this file in an editor from the
Atom > Stylesheet
File > Stylesheet
Edit > Stylesheet
menu.

For example, to change the colors of the Status Bar, you could add the following rule to your
styles.less
file:

The easiest way to see what classes are available to style is to inspect the DOM manually via the Developer Tools. We'll go over the Developer Tools in great detail in the next chapter, but for now let's take a simple look. You can open the Developer Tools by pressing
Alt+Cmd+I
Ctrl+Shift+I
, which will bring up the Chromium Developer Tools panel.

With the Developer Tools, you can inspect all the elements in Atom. If you want to update the style of something, you can figure out what classes it has and add a Less rule to your stylesheet to modify it.

Our previous study of childhood leukaemia and distance to high-voltage overhead power lines in the UK has been included in an international pooled analysis. That pooled analysis used different distance categories to those we did, which has focussed attention on the effect of that choice. We re-analyse our previous subjects, using finer distance categories. In the 1960s and 1970s, when we principally found an elevated risk, the risk did not fall monotonically with distance from the power line but had a maximum at 100–200 m. This weakens the evidence that any elevated risks are related to magnetic fields, and slightly strengthens the evidence for a possible effect involving residential mobility or other socioeconomic factors.

The present work explores challenges when assessing organ dose and effective dose concerning image-guided treatments. During these treatments considerable x-ray imaging is employed using technically advanced angiographic x-ray equipment. Thus, the radiation dose to organs and the related radiation risk are relatively difficult to assess. This has implications on the optimisation process, in which assessing radiation dose is one important part. In this study, endovascular aortic repair treatments were investigated. Organ dose and effective dose were assessed using Monte Carlo calculations together with a detailed specification of the exposure situation and patient size. The resulting normalised organ dose and effective dose with respect to kerma-area product for patient sizes and radiation qualities representative for the patient group were evaluated. The variability and uncertainty were investigated and their possible impact on optimisation of radiation protection was discussed. Exposure parameters, source to detector distances etc varied between treatments and also varied between image acquisitions during one treatment. Thus the derived normalised organ dose and effective dose exhibited a large range of values depending greatly on used exposure parameters and patient configuration. The derived normalised values for effective dose varied approximately between 0.05 and 0.30 mSv per Gy·cm when taking patient sizes and exposure parameters into consideration, the values for organ doses exhibited even larger variation. The study shows a possible systematic error for derived organ doses and effective dose up to a factor of 7 if detailed exposure or patient characteristics are not known and/or not taken into consideration. The intra-treatment variability was also substantial and the normalised dose values varied up to a factor of 2 between image acquisitions during one treatment. The study shows that the use of conversion factors that are not adapted to the clinic can cause the radiation dose to be exaggerated or underestimated considerably. A conclusion from the present study is that the systematic error could be large and should be estimated together with random errors. A large uncertainty makes it difficult to detect true differences in radiation dose between methods and technology—a prerequisite for optimising radiation protection for image-guided treatments.

Company Profile

Silicon Software GmbH produces off-the-shelf products and customer specific OEM solutions with its hardware and software developments for Machine Vision and quality inspection in automation. The focus lies on the intelligent image processing boards of the microEnable product series and the VisualApplets software for the graphical programming of FPGA vision processors.